Categorized | General

You could have got to the point where Blair wouldn’t have dared make the remarks that he did on the Richard

Posted on 03 August 2010

You could have got to the point where Blair wouldn’t have dared make the remarks that he did on the Richard and Judy show.”The Prime Minister said on ITV’s This Morning that if Hoddle’s remarks had been correctly reported “it would be very hard for him to stay”. After all, humility goes a long way in this country.”He could have come out and denied believing that the disabled deserve their lot, saying that he was sorry for any distress caused. Invest in good PR advice, they claim, and we’ll show you how to survive your gaffe.
“Every situation is savable,” says the celebrity publicist Max Clifford “Just look at Clinton. My strategy would have been to get Hoddle to admit that he wasn’t good at English – that’s why he got into football. In one story, the England football manager expresses a view on reincarnation that has nothing to do with football He is hounded from his job.

Another man, the Chief Inspector of Schools, is quoted suggesting that a relationship between a teacher and a pupil can be “educative” at a time when the Government is specifically legislating to outlaw such relationships He appears to be keeping his job. The lesson that the public relations industry would have us learn from the Glenn Hoddle and Chris Woodhead stories is the power of crisis management. Two men, two gaffes, two Saturday morning newspaper exclusives But two stories with very different endings. But wouldn’t it be better if this extraordinary editor decided to use his influence to create just a little more understanding of why refugees leave their countries, and what most of them bring to our nation?. But 30,000 jobs have been created by Ugandan Asians in the Midlands since, and on the 25th anniversary of our arrival the successes in the community were even praised by the paper.Perhaps we should send an appealing Somali or Kosovan refugee to work for Dacre, if that is what it takes to change direction for the paper. Thus the anti-refugee obsession carries on.I came here in 1972, a dispossessed person from Uganda The Mail told us at the time there was no space for us here.

More cases might have emerged if they had done a spread, say, on nurses who have broken the law.When I was researching my book, True Colours, on attitudes to multiculturalism, ex-Mail journalists told me that the Immigration Services Union had a direct link with the paper and sought to exaggerate the “problem” of illegal immigration. Recently pages were devoted to the crimes committed by asylum seekers and refugees in this country. Of course, none of the reports included information on violations of human rights in the countries where asylum-seekers came from, or explained that the Geneva Convention excludes people who are fleeing natural disasters, such as earthquakes None of those quoted were asylum-seekers. It was sensational; it sold papers and added moral worthiness to a vast list of other qualities that give the Mail its unassailable reputation. It may even have given the paper licence to hound its traditional victims even more viciously. Without doubt, asylum seekers have long been among the top targets of the paper, and they can expect even less mercy today. Yesterday it was no surprise to see a page lead exposing illegal immigrants from the war in Kosovo “queuing up for jobs in the black economy”.Journalist Paul Coleman carried out a survey of the national newspapers on the press coverage of asylum-seekers for the think-tank the Runnymede Trust.

This post was written by:

admin - who has written 123 posts on Opiate For The Masses.

Contact the author

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Next Articles